JUDGMENT :

Kalyan Rai Surana, J.

Heard Mr. Tony Pertin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Ete, learned Advocate General I/c., for the State, assisted by Ms. K. Wangmo, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.

2. The petitioner was appointed as the State Chief Information Commissioner of the State of Arunachal Pradesh on 13.10.2006, and he had retired from the said post on 28.02.2011. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the provisions of section 16(5) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act for short) and has submitted that the petitioner was entitled to salary and allowances at par with the Chief Election Commissioner of India. In this regard, it was submitted that section 8 of the Election Commission (Condition of Service of Election Commissions and Transaction of Business) Act, 1991 (1991 Act for short), provides for “other conditions of service”, and that the petitioner was entitled to all such benefit, which was enjoyable to the Election Commission. It was submitted that section 8 of 1991 Act had contained r